Dr. No (1962)

Starring: Sean Connery, Joseph Wiseman, Ursula Andress, Jack Lord, John Kitzmiller

Director: Terence Young

Genre: Action, Adventure, Thriller

Rating: B

Prior to last night I had never actually watched a single James Bond movie.  I’d seen bits and pieces growing up – my dad was a fan – but I’d never watched an episode from start to finish.  Having now done so I’m not entirely sure what to think.  I wouldn’t say that Dr. No is a bad movie, but it’s definitely not what I expect when I think of an action movie – although a huge part of that would be the result of cultural differences that have developed since the 60s.

Another thing that may be an element of its time is the sheer simplicity of the plot: a British intelligence agent, John Strangeways (Timothy Moxon), is ambushed and killed in Jamaica.  The result is that MI6 agent James Bond (Connery) is tasked with going to Jamaica and investigating the death – and determining whether or not it’s related to a cooperation with the CIA on a case involving the disruption of rocket launches.  While in Jamaica Bond liaises with CIA operative Felix Leiter (Lord) and Strangeway’s employee Quarrel (Kitzmiller) and sleeps with the film’s Bond girls.  He also learns about the reclusive Dr. No (Wiseman), who owns the island of Crab Key – which is reportedly guarded by dragons.

I have to say I enjoyed the simplicity of the plot.  It’s something that you really don’t see a lot of these days, especially in action movies.  There’s always some sort of twist – or at least an attempt at one – as the screenwriters and directors try to keep their audiences guessing.  I did find Dr. No to be a bit predictable, but I’m not entirely sure how much of that is a consequence of my being very familiar with post-Bond action movies – many of which utilize similar tropes that I expect would not have been as over used at the time – and how much of it is simply that the film is predictable.   I really liked how all the things that you associate with a James Bond film were already present in Dr. No, despite it being the first of the series – there’s the “Bond, James Bond,” line, the martinis, the Bond Girls, and the theme song that instantly makes you think of Bond.  I’m sure there were other elements that are very thematic of the series but not necessarily as well known as well, and I’m looking forward to picking up on them as I continue with the series.

I did really enjoy Connery as Bond, although I have to say he wasn’t exactly the most charming of heroic characters.  I’m used to my action heroes going through a girl (or two) a movie, I’m just not used to them being so… well, for lack of a better word, Bond is rather chauvinistic.  You can see a bit of TonyStark in him (or perhaps you can see a bit of Bond in Stark?), but something about the straightforwardness of the character makes it really unappealing.  You can also see this in the fact that his sidekick is a plucky black guy who seems to do as much of the work as Bond – if not more – but neither gets credit nor girl.  The girl was similarly portrayed; she struggled between being a damsel in distress and a distressed damsel, but either way she was there so that Bond could save and woo her.  Really rather one sided – but then, I think the only character that had development in this movie was Bond himself.  It was a fun and simple journey, but I don’t think it was an overly developed one.  Once again, though, that could just be an element of the genre and the time.  Random Bond fact: while Ursula Andress portrays Bond Girl Honey Ryder two other actresses (Nikki van der Zyl and Diana Coupland) voiced her, one for her speaking and the other her singing.  Neither of them were mentioned in the film's credits.  Joseph Wiseman, however, was the only early Bond villain to not have his voice dubbed by another actor.

Lord John and the Hand of Devils

Author: Diana Gabaldon
Genre: Historical, Mystery, Anthology
Rating: B

I've already reviewed the three individual novellas that make up this collection, "Lord John and the Hellfire Club," "Lord John and the Succubus," and "Lord John and the Haunted Soldier," but I thought that I might also review the collection as a whole.  The theme that connects each novella, asides from the overall connection of being a Lord John novella, is an initial apparent connection to the supernatural - although as each novella climaxes it becomes clear that supernatural elements are not entirely at play.

My one big problem with this collection was the fact that, while arranged chronologically, if you want to read the story entirely chronologically you cannot sit down with this work and read from cover to cover - there are two novels whose events happen in between the events of these stories.  Lord John and the Private Matter takes place between "Hellfire Club" and "Succubus" and Lord John and the Brotherhood of the Blade occurs in between "Succubus" and "Haunted Soldier."  It kind of makes reading this a bit of a hassle, having to go from one book to another and then back again, although I do appreciate having these stories collected in general - the other option being tracking down the anthologies in which they were initially written (which I have had to do for the later Lord John novellas, "Custom of the Army" and "Lord John and the Plague of Zombies").  My smaller problem is the lack of a historical note for these stories - "Succubus" does have a small one, but the others don't.  Given as I know that Gabaldon's publishers are willing to let her write lengthy tomes, I think she could have gotten away with adding a bit more to discuss the history that she utilizes in her books.

Despite those problems, however, I really did like this collection.  I really liked how these stories were related thematically, and I really enjoyed the fact the way that they each referenced each other.  Events in one novella affect the events in the next novel, or even another novella.  Secondary characters reappear, and the overall antagonists in the series all make appearances.  If you're a fan of Gabaldon's work, then I think this is a good addition to your collection.

Lord John and the Haunted Soldier

Author: Diana Gabaldon
Genre: Novella, Historical, Mystery
Rating: B-

There were elements of  "Lord John and the Haunted Soldier" that I liked, and elements that I disliked.  The story deals with the consequences of the explosion of a cannon. Tom Pilchard, that Lord John momentarily is in command of during Lord John and the Brotherhood of the Blade.  An inquiry has been formed as Grey's cannon was not the only one to explode: in the previous ten months, a total of eight cannons have exploded, causing a lot of death and injury among the British army.  During the inquiry it is insinuated that Grey is at fault for the explosion of his cannon and that the overall fault lays in faulty gunpowder - gunpowder that is produced by Grey's elder half-brother, Edgar DeVane.  Once again, it is up to Grey to take up his own investigations and ensure his family's honour.

The one thing that I really liked about this story was the fact that by this point in the series a group of antagonists are clearly being established.  While none of these antagonists are actual villains in any of the books they do appear regularly and their dealings are often antagonistic to that of Grey's.  I am looking forward to the point at which Grey actually faces off with these individuals directly, and I wonder if he will do so one-on-one or if it will be a great face off between him and all of them.  The book was also very fast paced, which was nice in comparison to its predecessor.  Gabaldon doesn't bog herself down with the details (a rarity) and focuses most on telling the story.  That having been said, I really wasn't attracted by the story.  I found parts of it interesting, but when it was all said and done I felt like the whole thing was handled a bit too easily.  Once again, a lot of it really felt a bit contrived.  Overall, not Gabaldon's best work, but also not her worst.

Week in Review: July 23 - 28

Movies - We finished off Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy, with The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises.  Wrapping up the week was the romantic comedy Did You Hear About the Morgans.  I'm a bit undecided on which is the best of the week; either way it's a Batman, but I'm not sure just which one was better.

Books - Book of the week was Bernard Cornwell's Stonehenge.  I've said it before and I'll say it again, I absolutely loved this book.

TV - TV show of the week was the first three seasons of Arrested Development.  Despite it being hailed as one of the best shows ever, I really had mixed feelings and disagreed with the outcry of it having been cancelled too soon.  Disagree with me?  Yell at me in the comments.

Recommendations - This week we recommended Step Up Revolution, Ruby Sparks, and Killer Joe.  To be honest, the only one I'm really looking forward to seeing is Step Up, which I think says a lot about the movies that I watch.

Next Week - Next week I plan on starting a review of the James Bond movies, which will eventually culminate with the release of Skyfall.  I'm going to try to get through all of the movies before Skyfall's release, so there'll be at least one James Bond movie reviewed a week for most of the next couple months.  This week will be Dr. No and From Russia With Love.  For books, I'm planning on finishing off the short stores in Diana Gabaldon's anthology Lord John and the Hand of Devils. 

Requests - Anything out there that you'd like me to review?  A book? A movie? A TV show?  Let me know in the comments and I'll try to get to it.

Arrested Development (Seasons 1 - 3)

Starring: Jason Bateman, Portia de Rossi, Will Arnett, Michael Cera, Alia Shawkat, Tony Hale, David Cross, Jeffrey Tambor, Jessica Walters, RonHoward

Creator: Mitchell Hurwitz

Genre: Sitcom

Rating: B-

Arrested Development is supposed to be one of the best TV shows of, at minimum, the twenty-first century, receiving both critical claim and several awards during its short time on air, which was brought to a close when it was cancelled by Fox – so called untimely by the hoard of people who allegedly watched it, despite the lack of a reflection of such in the ratings.  I’m just going to stick this out there: when Fox gives a show multiple seasons, doesn’t screw around with its timeslot, and airs episodes pretty much in order, then cancels it due to poor ratings it isn’t exactly unjustified – especially if said cancellation comes with warning and the show is able to wrap up many of its storylines.  While I’ve enjoyed my fair share of cancelled shows, both Fox and otherwise, and lamented a few of them, I rarely hold it against the network.  The treatment of Firefly was a travesty, the treatment of Arrested Development not so much.

The show follows the excessively wealthy Bluth family; patriarch George Bluth, Sr. (Tambor), his wife Lucille (Walter), eldest son George “Gob” Oscar Bluth II (Arnett), protagonist Michael (Bateman), his son George Michael (Cera), Michael’s twin sister Lindsey Fünke (de Rossi), her husband Tobias (Cross), their daughter Mae “Maeby” (Shawkat), and the youngest Bluth son Byron “Buster” (Hale). At the start of the series George Sr. is arrested for defrauding investors and grossly spending the company’s money on personal expenses, which serve to pay for the family’s lavish lifestyle. Following a series of blunders, Michael is named President of the Bluth company and tasked with the job of saving both the company and the family; in doing so he asks his sister and her family to move into the Bluth model home with him and his son. Hilarity ensues over the course of three seasons as there are multiple escape attempts, ridiculous legal proceedings, numerous attempts to bring the family back together, save the company, and even to screw each other over. The entire show is presented in a documentary style format, as is narrated by series executive producer Ron Howard.

There are elements about this show that I really enjoyed.  I didn't really like Michael himself, but I did like Lindsey, George Bluth, Sr, and Lucille.  Their exploits were the most entertaining for me, especially as George Bluth, Sr began his run from the law.  The other characters for me were just a bit too over the top - while Michael's inability to really deal with his family got annoying, really fast, as did his rather overbearing relationship with his own son.  There were, however, a few running jokes of the series that I enjoyed - Gob's chicken dance in itself was rather lame, but I did enjoy the scene where all the Bluths were each doing their own chicken dance to mock Michael.  The many, many questions of Tobias' sexuality were great, especially once it became clear that they'd decided that Tobias really was gay.  A lot of this show was really over the top though, and really lame.  Some of the plots just seemed to go on for too long, especially the constant incest plot.  By the end of it I felt like I had watched something that while I had enjoyed, I also felt had ended well and didn't need to continue.  Not the greatest show, nor even one of the best of the decade, but others clearly disagree with me.

Recommendations: July 27

Step Up Revolution - The fourth instalment in the Step Up franchise many people have got to be wondering just how the hell this film even got made.  I, on the other hand, am really excited to see this movie.  The plot will be shit, the acting will be shit, but the dancing will be awesome.

Ruby Sparks - While working on his latest novel, a struggling novelist creates his dream girl - who comes to life.  Somehow this movie sounds like a romantic comedy version of Ted, but I'm thinking it could be good.  Or really bad.  One of the two.

Killer Joe -A guy plots a hit on his mother so that he can collect the insurance money and pay off his debt.  Despite it's current limited release it's starring a number of big names and is already being predicted for award talk, so it's sparked my interest.

I've been trying to suggest DVDs that are either new releases or re-releases the week that I recommend them.  This week, there's really nothing out, at least not that I'd want to recommend, so I'm pulling one off of the shelf.  Check out A Knight's Tale, an older movie, but still a good one.  Heath Ledger was one of my favourite actors, and this movie has always been one of my favourites of his roles.

The Time Traveler's Wife - Audrey Niffenegger's first book, The Time Traveler's Wife isn't for everyone.  It jumps around a lot and to some can be hard to follow.  But it's awesome.  Just about every minute of it.  You should read this, regardless of whether you like sci-fi, romance, or fantasy.  It's just that good.

Did You Hear About the Morgans? (2009)

Starring: Hugh Grant, Sarah Jessica Parker, Sam Elliott, Mary Steenburgen, Elisabeth Moss, Wilford Brimley, David Call, Michael Kelly, Jesse Liebman

Director: Marc Lawrence

Genre: Comedy, Drama, Romance

Rating: C

This is another one of those movies that really isn’t good, but at the same time is enjoyable to watch.  My recommendation is if you don’t spend too much time thinking about it, movies like Did You Hear About the Morgans? are a lot better than you would expect.

Paul (Grant) and Meryl (Parker) Morgan are a high power Manhattan couple who have separated due to Paul’s previous infidelity.  Paul is determined to rekindle their relationship, while Meryl is very reluctant to do so – in addition to the infidelity, she desires to adopt a child, while Paul grew distant while they were attempting to adopt.  Then, one night following dinner, Paul and Morgan witness a murder and are put into protective custody.  When it becomes clear that the police are unable to hide them on an island populated by 1.5 million people, they are put into the witness protection system and relocated to Ray, Wyoming, where the pose as the cousins of local sheriff (Elliott) and his deputy and wife (Steenburgen).

Okay, so the entire premise of Morgans is ridiculous and over the top.  From them having seen the murder in general to the reasoning for them to go to Wyoming, to everything that happens to them once they’re in Wyoming.  It’s all just ridiculous.  There are plenty of more logical places that they would have been moved and even the idea of moving them alone is just a bit contrived.  That having been said, if you put the idea that this is all ridiculous aside, it’s fun and cute.  Sarah Jessica Parker is not the best actress, but Hugh Grant is very skilled at carrying weaker actors – it’s a real talent that he has.  He also has a way of making you not realize that the plot is ridiculous, contrived, and predictable.  I might be a bit biased; I think I could watch just about anything that had Hugh Grant in it.  He’s just that good at the lame romantic comedy, which describes Did You Hear About the Morgans? rather perfectly.

It’s not all just Hugh Grant, though.  The side characters are as good as he is.  I loved Elliot and Steenburgen in this and even had the idea that at one point they were just like Paul and Meryl Morgan – two city slickers who were put into the witness protection and let it change them.  While this was never actually said in the movie it’s the background for them that I’ve made up.  Paul and Meryl’s assistants, Jackie Drake (Moss) and Adam Feller (Liebman), are also interesting characters, although a bit more predictable.  It’s nice to see Moss expand beyond her role in Mad Men, although this isn’t exactly a step forward.  What can I say, I enjoyed this movie no matter how much I probably shouldn’t have.

The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

Starring: Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, Anne Hathaway, Tom Hardy, Marion Cotillard, Joseph Gordon-Levitt

Director: Christopher Nolan
Genre: Action, Comic, Drama, Thriller
Rating: A+

"Gotham, take control... take control of your city. Behold, the instrument of your liberation! Identify yourself to the world!"

I’m going to stick this out there right at the start – my biggest problem with The Dark Knight Rises is Bane’s voice.  While I actually liked the accent overall, as well as the sheer amount of thought that Hardy appeared to put into it, there were points when it was rather screechy and as a result what Bane was saying became a bit incomprehensible.  I always got the general gist of what he was saying, but I often lost the actual words, which was a bit disappointing because in this movie Bane is more than just a brute, he’s almost Shakespearian in his way of speaking and thinking.  On the plus side of the accent, however, there were also points when he sounded like Sean Connery.  I’m just going to throw this one out there: sounding like Sean Connery is never a bad thing.  Never.

The Dark Knight Rises picks up eight years after the events of The Dark Knight. Bruce Wayne (Bale) is living as a hermit, basically, in Wayne Manor, allowing Alfred (Cain) and Fox (Freeman) to basically run his operations. Bruce is still haunted by the death of Rachel and suffering from the injuries that he sustained as Batman, notably a pronounced limp. The streets of Gotham, however, have been cleaned up because of his sacrifice, and the city has gone on to worship the fallen hero, Harvey Dent – although Commissioner James Gordon (Oldman) clearly regrets his part in the cover up of Dent’s crimes and desires to come clean about them, when the time is right. The time is taken from him rather suddenly; following a series of events initiated by cat burglar Selina Kyle (Hathaway), Bruce loses his fortune and control of his company after Bane attacks Gotham’s stock exchange. Bruce decides to bring Batman out of the closet, while also moving to relinquish control of the company to Miranda Tate (Cotillard), instead of his business rival John Daggett (Ben Mendelsohn), who’s been working with Bane. Batman is unsuccessful in defeating Bane, however, who seizes control of Wayne Enterprises, turns a fusion core that they’d created into a nuclear bomb, and uses it to take over the city – unleashing chaos and entrapping the majority of the city’s police force underground. Not underground is Gordon and newly promoted special duty police officer John Blake (Gordon-Levitt), who conspire to disable the bomb and take back their city.

To be honest, going into this movie I wasn't entirely sure what to expect.  I tried to keep my expectations down; I didn't want my love for The Dark Knight to spoil this movie.  That happens so often with sequels in general.  They might be good movies on their own, but because of the build up as the result of their predecessor(s) they fall short.  I was expecting Dark Knight Rises to fall short - especially once I heard that the villains were going to be Bane and Catwoman.  Between Batman & Robin and Catwoman Bane and Catwoman were both big parts of two of the worst movies ever.  It's hard to follow up Heath Ledger's Joker with villains associated with the worst Batman movies ever.

Dark Knight Rises takes all of your fears and throws them away.  It makes you forget that the horrors of previous Batman movies never happened.  Despite Bane's occasional vocal problems he still has a flowey, poetic way about him that makes him more than just a brute.   While it takes a bit for the movie to develop, with Nolan falling back into the use of flashbacks and reused footage from Dark Knight, once it does develop you're almost completely sucked into it - asides from the occasional jarring moments when Bane becomes incomprehensible.  The thing that I really liked about this movie was that it isn't all about the action.  It's making a social commentary about anarchy, the one percent, and standing up against evil.  It was about the people of Gotham growing up and taking back their city.  Some of my favourite parts of this movie weren't the fight sequences but rather the slower and quieter montages of the characters as they come to terms with what they face.

There are problems with The Dark Knight Rises beyond just Bane's voice.  I really didn't like what they did with Alfred in this movie, it almost felt like Michael Caine was phoning in his performance here.  It seemed very un-Alfred like.  A lot of people seemed to intuitively know things in this movie, or else I just missed the explanation on how some of them knew things that they knew.  The movie was a lot slower than Dark Knight and took a bit more to get into, although as I've already mentioned this wasn't all bad.  I really enjoyed the twists that the movie brings.  I saw some of them coming from the onset, saw others just before it happened, and was caught completely unaware by others.  All in all, it was a good journey.

The Dark Knight (2008)

Starring: Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Heath Ledger, Gary Oldman, Aaron Eckhart, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Morgan Freeman

Director: Christopher Nolan
Genre: Action, Comic, Drama, Thriller
Rating: A+

"Why so serious?"

I’m not really sure if there are words to describe just how much I was blown away by The Dark Knight, the second in Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy.  This movie has you sitting on the edge of your seat from start to finish and appears to complete Gotham’s descend into a really dark world.  My favourite part, though, is Ledger’s take on the Joker and the very sick and dark form of humour that he brings to the film.  While Batman movies have been funny before, they’ve never done so in a way even remotely similar to Heath Ledger’s Joker.

The Dark Knight escalates things from the way that they were left off in Batman Begins. While the mob still rules in Gotham it is clear that the duo of Batman (Bale) and Lieutenant Jim Gordon (Oldman) are making a very clear dent in the business. Mob bosses are now definitely scared of the Batman, and the new district attorney Harvey Dent (Eckhart) has a tough on crime approach that makes him a good ally to this dynamic duo. That is, until a new villain arrives on the scene. Calling himself the Joker he is a perpetrator of anarchy and desires to cause Batman to break his one unbreakable rule – he wants to drive Batman to kill. Alongside the struggles of Batman is the slow downfall of Dent, who at the start of the film is a stoic man unwilling to compromise his morals – an unmasked counterpart to Batman, and a good match for Rachel Dawes (Gyllenhaal), who acts as the damsel in distress to both Bruce Wayne/Batman and Dent. Just as it appears that they’ve caught the Joker, Dent and Rachel go missing – it’s up to Batman and the good men of Gotham’s police force to find them in time.

This movie takes the set up that Bale established in Batman Begins and runs with it. We know who the players are and the world in which they live; it’s been established that Bruce Wayne is a brooding, stoic man who carries a torch for Rachel – a torch that while being mutual is in competition with her feelings for Dent. Since we already know this – as well as Batman’s decision to not kill – Nolan doesn’t need to waste the viewers time re-establishing all of this. Instead he just plunges us straight into the action – even going so far as to introduce the movie’s villains before he reintroduces its heroes. And from that moment when he takes out the bus driver Ledger’s the Joker has us completely captivated, assuming that it even took that long.  The best part is that never once does he do anything to rip you out of the compelling narrative that he's weaving; as soon as you're sucked in, you're in it until the end.

The acting in The Dark Knight is stellar, but with this kind of cast it shouldn't come as a surprise.  I much preferred Maggie Gyllenhaal's Rachel Dawes to Katie Holmes', however I am still disappointed that they had to recast her.  I hate it when they recast characters, be it in the movies or on TV, as I find that it takes away from the narrative.  It's one thing when it's James Bond, which is special, and another thing when it's pretty much anything else.  I love, love, love Heath Ledger in this movie.  He was one of my favourite actors, and I think this movie just really shows his genius.  The Joker has always been one of the best Batman villains, and in this film Ledger proves to be one of the best Jokers.  That the film doesn't stop with the one villain makes things even better.  The problem with Batman Begins is that it was unremarkable and rather slow: it spent so much time setting up the premise that by the time everything was established half the movie was over and then they finally got around to dealing with the villains and plot twists.  Dark Knight doesn't waste any of this time and as a result it's plot twist after plot twist, action sequence after action sequence, and the whole thing just blows your mind.  Even when it isn't the big action sequences - even when it's just the Joker strolling down the street you're completely captivated.  If you haven't seen this movie yet, I highly recommend you do.

Stonehenge

Author: Bernard Cornwell
Genre: Historical
Rating: A

In my opinion it almost seems as though the further back in time Bernard Cornwell goes, the better his stories get.  Don’t get me wrong, I love the Sharpe and Starbuck books as much as the next Cornwell fan, but it seems like his best work is set in periods of time where there is little to know actual historical records; his three best works are, in my opinion, the Saxon Stories (set twelve hundred years ago), the Warlord Chronicles (set in Arthurian Britain), and Stonehenge (set some four thousand years ago).  Of the currently ten novels set out by these three designations, my favourite individual novel is probably Stonehenge, although in providing the complete story instead of being a part of a greater work it has an advantage over the other novels.

Stonehenge is a how it could have happened type novel, where Cornwell looks at Stonehenge and attempts to tell a story around how it came to be.  Set primarily in the settlement of Ratharryn, the story follows three half-brothers, Lengar, Camaban, and Saban, the sons and eventual heirs of the tribe’s chief, Hengall.  Lengar is the eldest and the fiercest; he is a warrior and dreams of one day leading his tribe to greatness, in opposition to his father’s more cautious nature.  Camaban is the middle child and the crippled; at the start of the novel he suffers from both a clubbed foot and a pronounced stutter and has been living for a number of years in exile from the tribe.  Where his brother dreams of greatness through war, Camaban dreams of greatness through the gods, notably the sun god, who the tribe calls Saul.  Saban is the youngest of the trio, and their father’s favourite.  At the start of the novel he is not yet a man, but through the course of the novel he proves himself to be more of a man than his brothers.  One day an outsider rides into the tribes’ Old Temple, where he is killed by Lengar who finds a hoard of gold on him.  Lengar dreams of using this gold to buy warriors, while his father insists that it will be buried under his hut, with the rest of the tribes’ treasures, although he does use some of it to build a new temple, the Sky Temple, at the site of the Old Temple.  This new temple is only the beginning, as a course of events change the tribe of Ratharryn and lead to the building of the temple that we now know as Stonehenge, although it’s never called such in the book.

The thing that I loved about this book was that I spent half of it yelling at the book and the characters within it for their behaviour.  I’m not a particularly religious person and a lot of this book is based around religious fever as the characters, fuelled by Camaban, attempt to draw the sun god closer to them so that they can end all death and suffering among mankind, as well as winter.  The book is one of Cornwell’s least factually based novels, with little real knowledge of the people and cultures that existed during the time when Stonehenge was built, but he takes what we do know and strings it together in an intriguing narrative.  Rather than taking an established world – as he does in all of his previously existing books, even to an extent the Warlord Chronicles – he contrives one out of his imagination, and does so with the same amount of detail that you would expect in any of his novels.  He even includes a typical Cornwellian historical note, a full twenty pages detailing the limited information that we do have, the places that he describes in the book, and the things that inspired him in his writings.

The thing that I like most about this novel is that while it’s primarily about the building of Stonehenge it’s also the story of Saban and the many troubles that plague his life.  From the moment that his elder brother kills the outsider and decides that he must also kill Saban in order to keep his find a secret Saban shows this degree of cunningness that helps save him through his endeavours – and helps to build the monument.  He grows as the story progresses, from a young child to a man with his own children, and I’ve always enjoyed reading works that attempt to capture a child’s prospective, even if only for awhile.  The other thing is that while Saban is the hero, he’s not overly heroic.  He’s far too cautious and prone to being trustful to really take action for much of the novel.  His plots are as elaborate as his brothers’ plots, but at the same time are of a much simpler nature – he is a simple man.  He’s an everyman, living in a prehistoric period.

Week in Review: July 15 - 21

Movies - This weeks reviews were High School Musical 3, Magic Mike, and Batman Begins.  An interesting twist happened here: the worst movie of the week was High School Musical, which in turn was probably the best movie of its trilogy.  The best movie was Batman Begins, the worst of its trilogy.

Books - Book of the week was Diana Gabaldon's Lord John and the Brotherhood of the Blade, the second novel and fourth instalment in the Lord John series.  Not as much of a mystery as the other stories, although there is a nice Jacobean plot to it (as is typical of Gabaldon's work), but there's a lot of really interesting character development.

TV - TV show of the week was the first season of The Big Bang Theory, because I seem to have a thing for the first season of shows lately.  Not the best season of the show, but still a good show.

Recommendations - Movie-wise the big one is, of course, The Dark Knight Rises, although DVD releases did include two 60th anniversary editions, Singing in the Rain and High Noon.

Next Week - I plan on continuing the Batman trilogy with reviews of The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises, while the book review is going to be Bernard Cornwell's Stonehenge.  Cornwell is one of my favourite authors and this is one of my favourite of his books, so I'm really looking forward to it.

Requests - Anything out there that you'd like me to review?  A book? A movie? A TV show?  Let me know in the comments and I'll try to get to it.

The Big Bang Theory (Season 1)

Starring: Johnny Galecki, Jim Parsons, Kaley Cuoco, Simon Helberg, Kunal Nayyar
Creator: Chuck Lorre and Bill Prady
Genre: Sitcom
Rating: B-

This wasn’t my favourite season of hit comedy The Big Bang Theory.  I think a big part of that is the characters; a lot of this season feels more like it’s trying to introduce you to the characters and the themes that would encompass the show, than anything else.  There is very little overlaying plot to the season, beyond the character’s sexual relationships, and a lot of the episodes can really be summed up by “this is the one where we meet Howard’s mother” or “this is the one where Raj tries alcohol.”  The jokes are still good and the reoccurring themes that the viewers have come to love are definitely here, they’re just not to the full speed of the later seasons.

The Big Bang Theory follows experimental physicist Leonard Hofstadter (Galecki), theoretical physicist Sheldon Cooper (Parsons), aerospace engineer Howard Wolowitz (Helberg), astrophysicist Rajesh Koothrappali (Nayyar), and Penny (Cuoco) the blond waitress and aspiring actress that lives across the hall from Leonard and Sheldon.  Leonard is the straightman of the series and the show's one source of a continued plot at this point in the series, his crush on Penny.  Sheldon is a former child genius with an eidectic memory, who is very neurotic.  Very, very neurotic - it is believed by some that he has Aspergers, OCD, and asexuality, and a lot of the show's jokes are based on him not really getting typical human interactions. Howard is... well, really at this point Howard is just a Jewish pervert who lives with his mother and makes inappropriate sexual advances towards everyone woman (other than his mother) who will talk to him.  Raj, on the other hand, is completely unable to talk with women, unless he's drunk.  Penny, meanwhile, provides the everyman to the four geeks.  As I already mentioned, this season is primarily about introducing the characters and getting the audience familiar with some of their quirks.  Not all of the later reoccurring gags appear in this season, but we do see "Soft Kitty", Sheldon's spot, sarcasm, and Howard's mother.  The season isn't as good as later seasons, but it definitely shows the promise and genius of the show.

A Note....

I was uncertain how to address what happened in Colorado at the Batman premier.  Then I found this picture done by artist and author of the webcomic Little League Yale Stewart.

What happened on Thursday night was a travesty.  A very disturbed person turned what should have been an amazing night into a nightmare.  My heart and thoughts go out to the victims and family's of the event.

Recommendations: July 20

The Dark Knight Rises - I made this joke yesterday and I'll make it again today: "na na na na na na na... BATMAN!” The final instalment in Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy, if you enjoyed the previous two films you'll like this one.  Clearly, movie producers realize this as there isn't really anything else coming out this week.  I was able to see it at last night's midnight premier, and really enjoyed it - look for my review on Wednesday.

Friends with Kids - I haven't seen this movie yet, but I suspect that I already know how it ends because... well, I watch romantic comedies.  That being said, this one features the same people who did Bridesmaids so... yeah, no. I still know how it ends, but it could be a good journey?

 Singing in the Rain - Did you know it's the 60th anniversary of the Gene Kelly and Debbie Reynolds musical?  I love musicals and I love Debbie Reynolds, so this is my DVD pick of the week.

High Noon - Speaking of 60th anniversaries, it's also the 60th anniversary of this Gary Cooper and Grace Kelly flick.  I really love how so many of the classics are now being released on Blu-ray, preserving their awesomeness for later generations.

Get the Gringo - Okay, I'll be honest, I have no desire whatsoever to see this movie.  I just find it funny that Mel Gibson is in a movie that features a racial slur in its title. Way to beat that reputation, Mel.

The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time - This book kind of blew my mind the first time that I read it.  About a 15-year-old boy with behavioural and social difficulties, this book makes you see the world in a different way.  Protagonist Christopher John Francis Boone takes it upon himself to investigate the murder of his neighbour's dog, while also dealing with the revelation that his life is not necessarily all that he thinks it is.

Batman Begins (2005)

Starring: Christian Bale, Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Katie Holmes, Liam Neeson, Cillian Murphy, Ken Watanabe, Tom Wilkinson, Rutger Hauer
Director: Christopher Nolan
Genre: Action, Comic, Drama, Thriller
Rating: B-

I’ve been trying to figure out how to write this for a bit, but all that I can actually think of is “na na na na na na na... BATMAN!” which I suspect you are all now doing. I’ve always had a thing for Batman; he’s probably my favourite superhero and definitely the only DC Comics hero that I like. In celebration of the release of the third and final instalment in Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy I’ve decided to re-watch the earlier instalments before catching The Dark Knight Rises. Having now dived into Batman Begins I’m almost questioning just why we love this series so much (almost – I know that the answer lies in The Dark Knight). While I’ve watched this movie a few times already it didn’t take me long to realize just how unmemorable Batman Begins was. Sure it’s dark and action packed, but there’s very little about it that’s awe inspiring and nothing really sticks out in your mind once you’ve watched it.

The movie tells the origins of Batman, from Bruce Wayne’s (Bale) initial encounter with bats and the death of his parents, to him making the decision to free Gotham from its criminal underworld, the training that he undertakes in order to be able to do so, and his return to Gotham and the creation of Batman.  While training, Bruce spends time in a Bhutanese prison, where he meets Ducard (Neeson) who offers to train him as a ninja with the League of Shadows, headed by Ra’s al Ghul.  That’s right, Batman is a ninja.  While he trains under Ra and Ducard, he disagrees with their methods and eventually burns their temple down and kills Ra, before returning to Gotham.  Once back at Gotham he enlists the help of long time family butler Alfred Pennyworth (Caine) and high ranking Wayne Enterprises employee Lucius Fox (Freeman), who has been delegated into a dead end job for opposing C.E.O. William Earle (Hauer) in the boardroom.  Bruce and Alfred build Batman’s lair underneath the Wayne mansion, while Fox provides Bruce with the technology needed to make Batman awesome, thus proving that any billionaire ninja can become a crime fighting unit if he has a secret lair.  Later, Batman’s allies are joined by Sergeant James Gordon (Oldman), Gotham’s only uncorrupt police officer.  Batman’s first target is the ruler of the underworld, gangster Carmine Falcone (Wilkinson), but what he doesn’t realize is that psychopharmatologist Dr. Jonathan Crane (Murphy) has an alter-identity as the Scarecrow, and has been dumping fear inducing toxins into Gotham’s water supply.  Oh, also there’s a girl: Rachel Dawes (Holmes), assistant district attorney and Bruce’s childhood friend adds some sexual tension, but really doesn’t become relevant in any way until the end.

There is nothing remarkable about Batman Begins.  It’s not that it’s not a good movie, but in terms of a Batman movie it doesn’t really stand out.  It’s not so horrible that it just sticks in your mind like a really bad dream – that would be Batman and Robin.  It’s not so ridiculous and over the top that you can’t help but love it – that would be the Adam West Batman.  Where Batman Begins is successful is not in the movie itself but in what it succeeds in doing for the Batman franchise and the superhero genre in general.  Previous superhero movies were prone to being campy and very light; look at the Sam Raimi Spider-Man movies, where you really do expect Spider-Man to say “Gee, golly” as he’s fighting crime.  Batman Begins takes this genre to a whole new level of grittiness.  Gotham is a dark and ugly world, completely free of camp that has haunted other films.  This film is the push that the genre needed in order to give us the far superior superhero movies of the last few years, from The Dark Knight to The Avengers.

Beyond that, the acting is stellar; Christian Bale is awesome, although the voice that he does for, well really both Bruce Wayne and Batman, is a bit ridiculous.  I almost wished that Bale would use his natural voice, although I somehow suspect that Batman with an English accent would have been a lot easier to identify.  He wasn’t the shining star in this movie though, although Bale did succeed in making Batman stand out far more than his adversaries (evidently, the trick to doing that is to make the villains not all that cool).  I think the real stars of this movie were Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, and Morgan Freeman.  Seriously, how can a movie go wrong with these three in it?  It’s kind of messed up when you care more about Alfred the butler than you do about Batman himself, but then that’s been a problem that’s long existed within this franchise.  I love how Caine developed his own backstory before portraying Alfred; it’s never determined in the film itself, but it gives him a deeper sense of who the man is and by extension creates a deeper character.  I got a similar feeling about Oldman and Freeman; they really knew the characters that they were portraying.  It’s also important to note that the accent that Oldman used in this movie, while not his natural one, was far better than the fake accent that Bale used. Come on everyone, say it with me “I’m Batman.”

Magic Mike (2012)

Starring: Channing Tatum, Alex Pettyfer, Cody Horn, Matt Bomer, Olivia Munn, Kevin Nash, Joe Manganiello, Matthew McConaughey, Adam Rodríguez, Gabriel Iglesias

Director: Steven Soderbergh

Genre: Comedy, Drama

Rating: B-

I like to try to give credit where credit is due.  With Magic Mike credit has to be given to the trailer, which I think did a really good job of presenting the movie without telling you everything that happened. So often these days movies are ruined by trailers; you find out the entire story by watching them, and all the best parts are included in them (in their entirety) so by the time you actually see the movie you already know how it ends.  The trailer for Magic Mike really isn’t like this.  All it really tells you is that Magic Mike is a movie about male strippers and one of them makes coffee tables and has a thing going on with this girl.  While the film is about that, there’s also a lot more to it – although, in many ways that is actually one of the biggest problems of Magic Mike.

This film is about two guys, Adam “the Kid” (Pettyfer) and Mike “Magic Mike” Lane (Tatum). Mike is a self described entrepreneur; he works a number of jobs, often in managerial type positions and is trying to save so that he can put a down payment on a loan that will enable him to open his own custom furniture business.  The Kid is somewhat of his opposite; he’s a slacker, immature, rash young man who seems to have no real aims in life.  At the start of the film he’s jobless and living on his sister’s couch, in need of a job but not really trying to find (and keep) one.  After meeting Mike a series of events unfold that results in the Kid getting a job at Xquisite, a popular nightclub that features male strippers.  From there the Kid’s life takes an interesting turn, especially after once he becomes involved in a drug selling scheme.  Mike, meanwhile is trying to straddle two worlds, pardon the pun, stripper by night and entrepreneur by day; he’s also growing closer with Adam’s sister, Brooke (Horn), while partaking in what was meant to be an on-again off-again relationship, but came across as a series of booty calls with Joanna (Munn). Overshadowing the whole thing is the attempt to move the club from Tampa to Miami (because Miami is where all good male strippers go in order to become famous? I have no clue).

A few criticisms of the movie that I’ve heard revolve around it not having a story – I disagree, and counter that the problem with Magic Mike is that it has too much story.  The film doesn’t seem to really know what kind of movie it wants to be.  A lot of it is presented as a mockumentary, which I actually really enjoyed, but at other points it seems to drop this in order for… well, for flashier strip scenes.  I think in the long run, the movie would have been far better served by picking one style (preferably the mockumentary) and sticking with it.  There are points when it is trying to be a funny stripper movie, points when it’s trying to be a serious stripper movie, and points when it’s trying to be a guy meets girl type of movie.  At some points it weaves these different genres together rather nicely, at other points it doesn’t seem to work as well.  I think the film would have gained a lot by simplifying some of these plots, removing some of the characters, and sticking to just one format. Where it does succeed, however is in the humour - especially among secondary characters, who are often doing things in the background - and the actual dancing.  I'm not talking about the stripping per say, but the dancing itself.  Say what you want about Channing Tatum's acting skills, he is a really good dancer.  I would love to see him do more expanding on that talent than along other lines that he's pursued in his acting career.

The next little bit is going to be somewhat spoilerish, and for that I apologize.  The film’s conclusion is rather open ended, having addressed some of the plots but not all of them.  There is a lot that is left undetermined, and even what is determined is rather vague in terms of ‘what could be’.  When I left the film I was actually rather unsatisfied by the ending because of just how abrupt it worked out.  Having read a few other reviews and a few threads on the ending on the IMDb boards, I think my opinion of the movie is a bit changed.  It was pointed out that the way that Magic Mike ends is a lot like real life; things don’t always get wrapped up with a nice little bow in real life, and people do come in and out of your life without any real conclusion to things.  Often times, a descent into a life of drugs doesn’t end with a happy resolution, and Magic Mike does rather subtly address this.  I’m not sure that I would say I’m happy with the ending as the film was, but with that in mind I think had some of the other problems of the movie been addressed, especially in terms of overall format, I would have been a lot less disappointed.  Really, in a lot of ways I think the ending for Magic Mike was a lot like the ending for Take This Waltz – neither were intended to resolve things, but rather make you think and leave you wanting more.  That having been said, however, Tatum has reported that they’re planning on doing a sequel, hopefully in which a lot of this stuff is going to resolve.

High School Musical 3: Senior Year (2008)

Stars: Zac Efron, Vanessa Hudgens, Ashley Tisdale, Lucas Grabeel, Corbin Bleu, Monique Coleman, Olesya Rulin
Genre: Musical, Romance, Family
Rating: C+

The third and, thankfully, the final installation in the High School Musical series, High School Musical 3: Senior Year picks up as the Wildcats are preparing for their high school graduation and the spring musical.  Kelsi (Rulin) has signed up everyone for the show and Gabriella (Hudgens) convinces them to do it - because, of course, singing and dancing still isn't cool, even though this is the third film in the series about the same kids singing and dancing.  It's also revealed that four of the students (Kelsi, Sharpay (Tisdale), Ryan (Grabeel), and Troy (Efron)) are being considered for one scholarship to Juilliard.  Gabriella, meanwhile, has been accepted to Stanford and has an opportunity to go early, despite the fact that she's committed herself to the spring musical.

The overall story of this movie is somewhere in between High School Musical and High School Musical 2. Once again there is a complete revert to start in terms of character development, Sharpay, Ryan, and the Wildcat boys having learned nothing from their experiences in the first two films.  The whole "we have to convince everyone to participate in the musical because they think that singing and dancing is lame" plot is lamer than singing and dancing appears to be in this universe.  It's been done to death and just in the course of three movies.  Likewise, the Sharpay is an evil bitch plot has been done to death.  I'd be fine with it if at the end of each movie she didn't seem to grow as a person and realize that her actions are wrong.  This is also seen, to a lesser extent, with Ryan, although his turn face isn't nearly as complete.  I was, however, really satisfied with the way that the plot was resolved - although I was rather annoyed by Gabriella's behaviour.  To me, it was rather un-Gabriella like, although I will say that it was a nice change in pace; usually I'm annoyed by Troy's behaviour.

In terms of music and general production, High School Musical 3 is far better than it's predecessors, a clear sign of its inflated budget.  Of the three films this was the only one to be released in theatres, the other two having been TV movies.  The music isn't oh my God amazing, but it's catchy and even features a bit of a shout out to the earlier movies.  The singing is still good and the lyrics aren't too ridiculous.  The musical numbers are also a lot flashier.  They looked more like what you would expect from a Disney type movie.

Lord John and the Brotherhood of the Blade

Author: Diana Gabaldon
Genre: Historical, Mystery
Rating: A

I think, to date, Lord John and the Brotherhood of the Blade has been my favourite of the Lord John series.  It is the most action packed of the series, with Grey actually commanding in Germany for a bit (and thus, putting to good use his title of Major), and also the most revealing, as Grey begins to tell the reader more of his and his family's history.  By the end of the novel you have a much firmer understanding of who Lord John Grey is and what it was that occurred in order to cause him to be such - and in order to cause his family to be the way that they are.  One of my favourite aspects of the Lord John stories is the way in which he interacts with his family.  Most of the interactions between Grey and his elder brother, Earl of Melton, are a bit stiff with Grey thinking about how close he and Melton are, but Melton being... well, a bit of an ass.  I was really happy to see moments in this book where Melton proves to be as good of a brother as Grey, even if he does so in a manner that is far from direct.

Brotherhood picks up with Grey having returned to England from his stint in Prussia.  From here he is plummeted into yet another mystery, although this one takes some time to develop.  At the start of the novel a page from the last journal that Grey's father, the Duke of Pardloe, wrote before his death turns up; Grey had always been told that the journal had been burned before Pardloe's death, with this page making it apparent that someone has the journal and thus knows the secrets that it contains.  A scandal surrounded the circumstances of Pardloe's death: at the time there had been rumours of a Jacobite plot, with it being insinuated that Pardloe was a member of it.  His suicide was taken to be a confession of sorts, the shame of which has haunted the Grey family since - as such, Grey's elder brother refuses to use his title of Duke of Pardloe, preferring instead to remain Lord Melton.  While both Melton and the Dowager Countess, Grey's mother, refuse to reveal any more about the issue, Grey embarks upon a journey to discover the circumstances of his father's death and to confirm once and for all that his father was not a Jacobite.  Throughout all of this is the marriage of the Dowager Countess to her third husband, General Sir George Stanley, and consequently the re-introduction of Stanley's step-son, the dashing Percy Wainwright.

I think a huge part of the reason why I enjoyed this novel is because it answered a lot of questions for me.  I have previously read Gabaldon books set in later periods that make a lot of references to this one, albeit without actually revealing the full details of what happened in it.  I've always questioned just who Percy Wainwright was and what his relationship with Grey was, which is nicely addressed in Brotherhood.  There is also a lot more of the family relationship developed in this novel, and in my opinion you get for the first time the real development of Grey's mother.  Despite being fictional, this family feels like a real one.  They turn to each other for help and worry about how things might affect other family members.  Likewise, they argue and bicker, coming to passes when the desires of one conflict with the desires of others.  Melton and the Dowager Countess are often seen trying to protect Grey and shield him from the potential shame of his father's actions.  Grey, in change, acts very much like the stubborn younger son and goes his own way.  The stubbornness of this family just makes them feel all that much more real.

There are a few problems with this book, though.  Despite the fact that the novel is more action packed than other Lord John stories it is also a lot slower.  It takes a long time for the mystery of the novel to progress, with much of the novel doing more to develop the characters than the actual plot.  For me, this worked as I was as much interested in the characters as the plot itself.  There is a bit of a squick factor in the relationship between Grey and Percy, and in the beginning I really felt like the whole relationship was a bit contrived.  As it developed I became more of a fan of the relationship in general, and I found it really interesting where Gabaldon took it.  Finally, there is the subplot of sodomite spies for the French.  In general, I think this plot was a bit convoluted and I'm not really sure how the whole sodomite aspect came into play - the one interaction with a character accused of being such makes it clear that he is not gay - so it also felt a bit contrived.  I couldn't help but feel that the only reason why that aspect of it was introduced was so that Gabaldon could show readers just how eighteenth century European society reacted to homosexuality - which as a reader I appreciated.  Seeing that aspect of it really explained just the constant threat to Grey's safety because he is a homosexual.  It made things a bit more real, and really made me wonder just who in Grey's family is suspicious of his inclinations and how they would react were they to find out.  In the end, a lot of the problems of the novel are really justified by the overall nature of the book.

Week in Review: July 9 - 14

Movies - This week we've reviewed  The Amazing Spider-Man, People Like Us, and The Spiderwick Chronicles.  The best of the bunch was Spider-Man, while the worst was Spiderwick Chronicles, but I doubt anyone is really surprised by that.

Books - Book of the week was George R.R. Martin's novella "The Sworn Sword," the second in his Tales of Dunk and Egg series.

TV - TV show of the week was the first season of Grey's Anatomy, which I will eventually be following up with the rest of the series.

Recommendations - There isn't actually anything out in movies this week that I think I'm likely to see in theatres - the recommendations were either for movies that I'm a bit iffy about or else are only getting a limited release.  The DVD releases were, for the most part, DVDs I haven't heard of before but they've all caught my attention - that, and American Reunion, which I already know to have been good.

Next Week - Next week, I plan on reviewing Diana Gabaldon's Lord John and the Brotherhood of the Blade, Magic Mike, and, in celebration of the new Batman movie, Batman Begins. I plan on re-watching the first two films in the Christopher Nolan Batman trilogy before catching the midnight show of The Dark Knight Rises, so look forward to those reviews.

Requests - Anything out there that you'd like me to review?  A book? A movie? A TV show?  Let me know in the comments and I'll try to get to it.

Grey's Anatomy (Season 1)

Starring: Ellen Pompeo, Sandra Oh, Katherine Heigl, Justin Chambers, T.R. Knight, Chandra Wilson, James Pickens, Jr, Isaiah Washington, Patrick Dempsey

Creator: Shonda Rhimes

Genre: Medical Drama, Serial Drama
Rating: B+

While not my favourite season of Grey’s Anatomy this also wasn’t my least favourite season.  Season one is about the relationships that the new interns of Seattle Grace Hospital are building.  Series protagonist Meredith Grey (Pompeo) sleeps with a stranger the night before her first day as an intern at Seattle Grace; the next day she discovers that her mystery man is none other than Derek Shepherd (Dempsey), a new attending at the hospital.  While Meredith is eager to put the affair behind them, leaving it as a forgotten one-night stand, Derek is eager to pursue it, despite it being against the rules.  Creating more drama are Meredith’s fellow interns; hardass Christina Yang (Oh), jerk Alex Karev (Chambers), former model Izzie Stevens (Heigl), and the insecure George O’Malley (Knight); the latter two become Meredith’s roommates early on in the season.  The cast is rounded off by the interns’ mentor resident Miranda Bailey (Wilson) a hardass known as “the Nazi,” attending Preston Burke (Washington), and Chief of Surgery Richard Webber (Pickens).

The basic overlaying plot of the first season is the relationship between Meredith and Derek and the way that the interns adjust to their new lives.  There are also, however, more secondary plots; the relationship between Christina and Burke (which is far more successful, and secretive, than the Mer/Der one), George’s crush on Meredith, and Meredith’s mother’s Alzheimer’s being the most prominent ones.

At this stage in the game, none of these plots are really all that strong on their own – beyond the two romances.  The thing that makes this season really remarkable is the way in which it sets the stage for a lot of things that happen in later seasons.  There’s Alzheimer’s, unplanned pregnancies, Alex being a douche, there’s sex in the on call room.  Having watched the series all the way through to the most current season it’s actually really easy to look back at Season 1 and see a lot of foreshadowing for what happens later – sure, some of the events that happened weren’t planned in advance, but the show definitely gives you a feeling that Shonda Rhimes has been plotting some of the major stuff for a long time now.  The individual episodes in general aren’t always all that great, but I do have to say I love how the entire season seemed to be setting up Meredith for the big reveal at the end; it’s almost like everything, from the first scene, was planned for that one crucial last season.

One thing that I do have to say about Season 1 is just how many reoccurring themes of the show were present here that have since been lost.  There’s the McDreamy, which we hardly hear anymore, and the “seriously”s, the sex in the on call room, and “the Nazi”.  Some of the characters that were in this season are no longer in the show, and others have had their roles rather reduced – while others have had theirs increased.  A lot of what I miss about the early seasons of Greys is the patients; as time has proceeded and our interns have grown things seem to be more about the doctors’ personal lives than the actual medicine.  There aren’t as many patients anymore, and the ones that they have aren’t as varied or as astounding.  You also don’t see the nurses anymore, which I think is a bit of a loss to the show.